One of my rules for discussing candidates...

[MrScorpio]

Basically, when critiquing them, it's best to leave criticisms of their age, gender, race, religion and sexual orientation out of it.

Support or oppose them on their policies, language and behavior.

How a woman "looks" has no place in my debate points. Insulting someone based on their gender is just as bad as insulting them in either a racist or homophobic way, because that's sexist as well.

I'm not tolerating sexist language either, I'm calling it out. If others want to call the woman candidate that they despise an "asshole," so be it. But, if it's something that can't be said of a man, it shouldn't be said of a woman.

Sexism is a slippery slope into misogyny and misogyny has no place on the left. Leave THAT to the wingers.

Just making this point known.

[shraby]

1. And that's the truth! Logos should be included in the list of things not worth arguing about.

Edited for tpyo

[MrScorpio]

2. Logos are fine nt

[niyad]

3. if said candidate is going to use her/his religion as the justification for screwing up my life,

I WILL comment, criticize, etc.

[FSogol]

4. Can we make an exception for Trumpys and Rand's hairpieces?

Please?